A/HRC/23/28 an appeals procedure has been included to give an opportunity to institutions to challenge the recommendations made by the Subcommittee on Accreditation; (b) The Subcommittee on Accreditation issues a number of focused and tailored recommendations to the national human rights institution under review, even when it recommends an “A” status; (c) The review has also become more transparent: recommendations formulated by the Subcommittee on Accreditation, once adopted by the Bureau of the International Coordinating Committee, are made public and distributed among national human rights institutions and other stakeholders. In addition, the reports of the Subcommittee are posted on the Internet (nhri.ohchr.org). 7. According to article 16.2 of the statute of the International Coordinating Committee Statute, where it appears that the circumstances of any national human rights institution accredited with an “A” status change in any way that may affect its compliance with the Paris Principles, the Chairperson of the Committee or the Subcommittee on Accreditation may initiate a special review of the accreditation of that institution. With regard to flagrant cases and pending the conclusion of the special review process, article 18.2 of the statute stipulates that where, in the opinion of the Chairperson of the International Coordinating Committee, an exceptional circumstance exists necessitating the urgent consideration of immediate suspension of an accredited “A” status institution, the Committee Bureau may decide to immediately suspend accreditation classification of that institution and initiate a special review, pursuant to article 16.2. A special review may result in either a reaccreditation of the institution with an “A” status or a recommendation that the institution be downgraded. 8. Article 18.3 of the statute describes the procedure to be followed for the immediate suspension of accreditation in exceptional circumstances. At the twenty-fifth annual meeting of the International Coordinating Committee, held in March 2012, the definition of “exceptional circumstance” was adopted as stipulated in the new article 18.4: For the purposes of article 18.2 and 18.3, an “exceptional circumstance” refers to a sudden and drastic change in the internal political order of a State, such as a break in the constitutional or democratic order or a declared state of emergency or gross violations of human rights and this accompanied by any of the following: there is a change in the national human rights institution enabling legislation or other applicable law that is contrary to the Paris Principles; there is change in the composition of the institution that is not undertaken in accordance with the established selection and/or appointment process; or the institution acts in a way that seriously compromises its compliance with the Paris Principles. 9. According to the accreditation procedure, as stipulated in article 12 of the statute of the International Coordinating Committee, the recommendations of the Subcommittee on Accreditation are submitted to the Committee Bureau to make the final decision on the accreditation status of the national human rights institutions reviewed, subsequent to the following steps: (a) The recommendation made by the Subcommittee on Accreditation is forwarded to the applicant; (b) Within 28 days of receipt of the recommendation, the applicant may challenge it by submitting, through OHCHR, a written communication to the Chairperson of the International Coordinating Committee; (c) The report of the Subcommittee, including the recommendation, is subsequently forwarded for a decision to the Committee Bureau, together with any challenges received; 4